How do you feel about Capital Punishment (ie. the death penalty)!!

[Gilgemesh]

Dead people don't become repeat offenders.
Also, its cheaper to off them early than it is to feed them for 50 years till they die. Either way they still die in jail.

[Night fall]

Eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth. It's not revenge, it's justice.

[lvlark]

Ok, I'm Dutch, and we have long abolished death penalties. I'm very happy about that.
Why? Taking someone else's life is always wrong. You place yourself above that other person, and not just a small bit. It's also so definitive. What if you were wrong in the end? There's ALWAYS that possibility.
It's bad for the criminal (now don't go telling me they don't have any rights, everybody has rights) and for whoever he/she still has as friends/relatives.
The main reason, as has been said, is for revenge/retribution. I find myself caring little for that (tis why I wouldn't play a dps pally lol). Ofcourse my opinion might change when someone close to me (or myself) becomes a victim, but I can't imagine it going that far. In fact, I find that cravings for revenge often exceed the original crime. Not the actual punishment enforced by law systems (in most cases, at least), but the victim may well, initially, want something way stronger than what was done to him/her.

[Shrouded]

Eye for an eye came from the old Hebrew Bible, and was adopted from Hamurabi's Code

Indeed, and if I'm not mistaken, I believe Jesus specifically shot down the eye-for-an-eye argument with the turn-your-other-cheek argument, according to the bible. So Christians really shouldn't be in favor of capital punishment.

[Deleted]

There are some instances, where honestly, capital punishment really is the best option. That being said though, I don't think it should realistically be used, and here's why.

It's impossible to ever be 100% sure of a verdict. In general, they've actually been proven to be quite inaccurate (look at all the cases overturned with new DNA evidence). Regardless, even in the most open and shut cases, there is ALWAYS some level of uncertainty. Because of this, if the verdict is indeed wrong, the state is, in essence, committing murder, not justice, and this is something that simply cannot be condoned. It's a mistake that cannot be risked. At least by putting a person in prison, there is a chance that one day, if it's found the prosecution was wrong, that person can go free, and an attempt at recompense can be made. That's simply accepting that our system is flawed, and doing the best to eliminate the error, and the effect of that error, rather than accepting that error and allowing it to potentially cause the irreversible and unjust punishment that is murder. It's impossible to achieve the level of confidence required to enact a punishment with that level of finality.

If there was some way to eliminate doubt, I think there are times where people simply cannot coexist with other people. It's rare, and it's unfortunate, but for the safety of others, it could occasionally be the best option. Realistically though, there will always be some doubt, and because of that capital punishment is simply not an option.

Exactly what I was trying to say.

100% /sign

[Jasyn]

The former, definitely... No innocent man deserves to die - we're not talking about the "possibility" of it happening, it has already happened.

I was speaking in general terms - i.e. - It's possible for innocent people to be executed, while also executing the guilty VS. letting everyone live and be a burden. I know innocent people have already been executed.

Aside from that - there's no feasible way to make prisoners earn their keep. The administration (guards) and deterrence/protection required would probably cost more than it costs to just keep them in a cell with 3 meals per day.

A better option, in my opinion, would be to completely strip away any liberties they have. Keep them in their cells, give them some vitamins, bread and water each day, and let them serve out their sentences alone.

The only case in which I'm "for" the death penalty is if the criminal is proven 100% guilty - it's just not possible today.

[noteworthynerd]

There's no coming back from death due to old age from life in prison either.

As technology improves, wrongful convictions become increasingly overturned. I know a man personally who was in jail for seven years, convicted of rape and murder, and the judgement was handed down based on the warped testimony of a six year old girl (it wasn't specifically her fault, the prosecution warped what she said to fit their needs). Thanks to improved DNA technology, the man was proven innocent and they found the real perpetrator.

What had happened if he had been sentenced to death instead and the technology hadn't improved as fast as it did? He'd be dead, and there'd be nothing anyone could do about it other than say "Oops...".

[lvlark]

Eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth. It's not revenge, it's justice.

What makes you think your feelings of justice aren't in some way intertwined with your feelings about revenge?

Edit: I know they are for me, I don't feel strongly about revenge, and thus I don't find much justice in doing to someone what he/she did to me.

[Catta]

This argument about: what if it was your family - is so freaking illogical when it comes to this discussion - What if it was your family member who was wrongfully convicted and executed unjustly...?

[MisterSheep]

i say put the prisonners in jail for 5-10 years, then if they show no signs of going better, you give the capital punishment.

End of the line? Less people with issues in jail, and only those that show signs of being better will get a second chance.

Edit: oh, and if the prisoner was innocent, a 5-10 year period should usualy be enough for him to be proven innocent

[noteworthynerd]

Aside from that - there's no feasible way to make prisoners earn their keep. The administration (guards) and deterrence/protection required would probably cost more than it costs to just keep them in a cell with 3 meals per day.

There have been numerous studies that prove the death penalty is more expensive than life in prison w/o parole, here's an example.

A better option, in my opinion, would be to completely strip away any liberties they have. Keep them in their cells, give them some vitamins, bread and water each day, and let them serve out their sentences alone.

I agree 100%, men or women who are convicted of heinous crimes should receive solitary confinement and only what is essential for human survival. No other liberties.

The only case in which I'm "for" the death penalty is if the criminal is proven 100% guilty - it's just not possible today.

Exactly how I feel about it as well.

[Borzo]

Eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth. It's not revenge, it's justice.

So basically your definition of justice = revenge?

[Deleted]

i say put the prisonners in jail for 5-10 years, then if they show no signs of going better, you give the capital punishment.

End of the line? Less people with issues in jail, and only those that show signs of being better will get a second chance.

Who gets to decide whether they've improved or not?

If it's anyone except the courts, there would be complete outrage. If it is the courts, you're wasting millions of dollars and excessive amounts of time trying to decide whether someone has 'Improved', ambiguous a statement that is, over time.

[Saeran]

Have a loved one raped and murdered and then tell me you are not for capital punishment. It is just as much for closer to the victims family then anything. Why should you get the right to live when my loved one was brutally raped, beaten and killed, all through a slow agonizing and humiliating fashion. Then to top it off, my tax dollars have to pay for the scum to rot in jail. Tell me how capital punishment is a bad thing in cases like this?

Have a loved one who is wrongly convicted of a capital offence, who is put to death, but is found to be totally innocent a few years down the line. Would you support the death sentence then?

i say put the prisonners in jail for 5-10 years, then if they show no signs of going better, you give the capital punishment..

I actually laughed at this one.. oh dear...

[Borzo]

This argument about: what if it was your family - is so freaking illogical when it comes to this discussion - What if it was your family member who was wrongfully convicted and executed unjustly...?

This is a good point.


Either way... letting a justice system be based and run on emotions is the most backwards, dangerous, and destructive thing I could imagine for it.

To all the emo people in this thread: Please, don't become judges or lawyers. Please. Save us from your emotions.

[Deleted]

So anecdotal evidence eh...

No, I also read news occasionally.

Being in prison in DK is more like being grounded. They get treated better then were living on wellfare, for example. In terms of material luxury. If that is what they only care about, then what makes you think they give a damn that they're bound to a place for a couple of years, all their needs covered, save freedom?

We are on the other hand getting off topic. I am for death penatly for people like Lundin. People that're in no way regretting what they did. The rest are just annoying and pussywhipped government.

[Deleted]

I'm for capital punishmen under one main restriction. A restriction that has been brought up already, but i'll repeat.

That there is no room for error.

However it's highly unlikely that you're going to get that.

[Jasyn]

There have been numerous studies that prove the death penalty is more expensive than life in prison w/o parole, here's an example.

I think that's a little outside of what I said. My comment was meant as a response to those proposing to put prisoners to work (to contribute to society). I don't think it's feasible due to:

-the additional costs related - i.e. hiring extra guards/managers to make sure they're doing what they're supposed to, not stealing parts to make weapons (for example), not using product to send messages, hiring inspectors to make sure the products they make are safe for general public, etc

- the additional security/deterrence systems needed - i.e. fences to keep them inside a contained area (think farmland?), machinery that can't be misused to harm someone, or escape, etc.

I don't even think prisoners could produce enough for the prisoners to survive, let alone pay for building upkeep, guards, etc.


Executing a criminal is ridiculously expensive. I actually wrote a paper on capital punishment in school comparing the costs of execution vs. life in prison.

[Shockzilla]

You have people that commit crimes and then you have carrier criminals, there is a difference. A person that goes into a store and forgets to pay for something has committed a crime; someone that goes in to a store with the intention of stealing is a criminal. In these cases both need to be punished and one needs rehabilitation.

On January 25, 1971 Charles Manson was guilty, if they let him out would you want him to live in your community? I know I wouldn’t. How about Jeffery Dahmer? Someone that kills and eats people, serial killers and the like need to be recognized as incurable, and a danger to everyone around them, period . No amount of rehabilitation is going to fix those twisted people.

I don’t see the death penalty as a form of justice or punishment, it is a means of removing a proven threat, a way of protecting those of us that don’t want to kill and eat each other. There is no reason to keep those type of people around.

I’m for the death penalty, it should be used to remove a threat and not as a deterrent or punishment.

[noteworthynerd]

Snip

Yeah, I incorrectly comprehended what you were saying. I agree with you - the cost of implementing some type of "work" program for maximum security inmates would likely be more costly than the other two options (life in prison w/o parole vs. capital punishment).

I'll stick with our "No liberties" option for criminals convicted of heinous crimes for now. =P